For the Benefit of AUB members

            It appears that for the benefit of AUB members who follow this blog, it behooves all concerned to clarify my role in Hill vs. Allred, AUB, Jenson, et al.  This blog is mine and mine only and not an official arm of Virginia Hill.  Because there have been so many “false” rumors spreading among innocent AUB members as a courtesy to them I have attempted to set the record straight as I understand it.

            I am one of two investigators who helped build the civil case for Virginia.  It was I who presented the case to Attorney Don Redd in the same fashion I have done many times in the past to the County Attorney as a deputy sheriff.  As a consequence Attorney Redd took the case on a contingency basis. 

            At the time Tom Green, a purported paralegal, was associated with Don Redd.  In fact, it was Tom Green who arranged for me to make the presentation.  I had chanced upon Green while doing some research.  When I learned that he lived in Snake Valley near the Granite Ranch, I started asking questions.    

            My function was to work directly with Don Redd and his paralegal.  The other investigator, Rod Williams, had moved to Washington State and it was his role to coordinate between Attorney Redd and Virginia Hill who resided in Southern Utah.

            It proved to be a satisfactory relationship.  Like Don Redd, Rod and I worked on a contingency basis.  Even though Rod had moved to Washington we kept in touch, sometimes daily, comparing notes, evidence and strategy. 

            When Tom Green was convicted of Criminal Non Support, Bigamy and Child Rape, and sent to prison, I worked directly with Attorney Redd – spending many hours playing “cat and mouse” with John Putvin, serving papers, running down leads, reviewing depositions, etc.  As I’m sure many AUB members are aware, I sat at the plaintiff’s table with Attorney Redd and Virginia Hill throughout the trial. 

            In essence I was working for Don Redd, however I never lost sight of Virginia Hill’s interest.  When she found it necessary to change attorneys, for reasons that are irrelevant in this context, I continued to work for Virginia and her law firm, Wall & Wall.

            For example:  before Don Redd was terminated he and the Defendant’s attorney, Drew Briney, had apparently discussed the possibility of Virginia accepting certain real estate properties in lieu of cash.  To my knowledge Don Redd had not consulted Virginia about receiving real estate, and she certainly did not make any overtures of that kind to Attorney Redd or her investigators.  Let me be clear!  To my knowledge Virginia has never initiated any desire or discussion about accepting property from the Defendants in satisfaction of the judgment.

            Out of curiosity I inquired directly with Mr. Briney about the property in question, implying that Virginia might take it into consideration.  As a result Mr. Briney forward to Wall & Wall, without exaggeration, a ream of documentation touting what I assume was  suppose to be a positive assessment of the Kootenia Creek Village property near Stevensville, Montana.   

            I researched the property, discussed it with Rod Williams and we agreed it would be foolhardy for Virginia to accept the Kootenia property.  To be precise, the property was a lemon.  I found it was common knowledge that AUB had for several years attempted to dump it on the market without success.  Attempts to manipulate Virginia into accepting this property, in my opinion is a reflection upon the probity of the AUB regime and should be kept in mind during future negotiations. 

            Among the stacks of papers sent to Wall & Wall were two mortgage rejection letters from Zion and Chase banks.  The two letters obviously had reference to Mr. Briney’s remark that AUB was unable to find a bank that would accept AUB controlled property as collateral.  However, the letters did not specify what property was unacceptable as collateral.  It is therefore assumed the property must have been the Kootenai property for it was among the Kootenai papers, if so it is no surprise why the banks turned AUB down.

            We all know that we are going through an economic slump.  Banks, it is said, are reluctant to make loans.  However, acting on the presumption that the Defendants had not offered as collateral property that was more negotiable, and that a Sheriff’s Sale may be necessary, I sent out two feelers to get an idea if there would be an interest in bidding on specific properties. 

            One source politely declined interest.  However, the other, allegedly one of the largest developers in the country, expressed interest and informed me they had passed on the information to another source, and asked that I keep them posted. 

            Building projects around the country had slowed to a crawl making it a buyer’s market.  I understand the developer in question is temporarily in a moratorium mode.  Nevertheless, the recession won’t last forever.  People keep having children who grow up and need homes.  Eventually, if government doesn’t screw up the economy any worse than it already has, the “law of supply and demand” will eventually take over.  That means for corporations with capital, a Sheriff’s Sale could become a real bargain – an investment for when the economy turns around.  

             Mr. Briney has suggested that if a developer is truly interested in specific property, that I’m not bluffing, the Defendants would like to deal directly with the interested parties.  However, it is plain to see that would not be good business on the part of the bidder who may be passing up a bargain.  A Sheriff’s Sale is far more advantageous to a buyer than dealing direct.  Besides, in essence the bidders would be dealing with Virginia and not the Defendants.  And of course, if a Sheriff’s Sale should come about, I will be researching other interested bidders. 

            I am an observer, investigator, evaluator and advisor besides a muckraker.  I do not have the authority to commit Virginia Hill to any legal agreement, nor have I implied that I have such authority. 

            In Mr. Briney has asked, “Please be patient.”  I for one think Virginia has been more than patient.  The theft of her money occurred in October 1989.  The facts show that the Defendants had more than one opportunity to settle with Virginia like men of integrity that they purport to be.  Had they done so they could probably have settled for the sum lost, 1.5 million.  But no, they chose to pretend innocence, cover up and conceal their culpability.  When the machination was eventually exposed, they chose to seek out every legal loop hole that would enable them to “beat the rap.”  In cases such as this, who profits most, the attorneys, of course.  Even when the complaint was filed in 1997, had they had the stomach to settle it would probably have been only a fraction of what they now owe. 

            The Defendants have had 13 years of Due Process in which to prepare for satisfying the judgment.  I would think the Defendant’s would be more forthcoming in that endeavor.  Could you blame Virginia if her patience is running out?

            It is not my intent to rub the judgment in the noses of the Defendants, but I feel compelled to make the following comparisons:

            There have been some unfair, untrue and malicious remarks circulated throughout AUB about Virginia Hill, as well as about Rod Williams and myself.  Since 1995 when I first met Virginia in person I have come to respect her as a  classy lady with unadulterated compassion and genuine integrity.  (Honesty is an essential characteristic of integrity.)

            As a former AUB adherent, for a period of about 20 years, I got to know the Defendants.  At one time I respected Owen, LaMoine and their priesthood cohorts.  As individuals they are likable people, I don’t hate them, but I cannot and will not like what they represent.  There is no excuse or justification for what they did to Virginia Hill.

            But through all the denying and lying by supposedly righteous ambassadors of Jesus Christ, they, the AUB leadership, did me a favor.  They brought me to my senses and demonstrated beyond a doubt that the real motive behind Mormon fundamentalism is power, money, sex and ego.

            Need I say more … from my view point if there is an afterlife, it will be individuals with Virginia’s scruples who will more apt to be celestialized.